| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
Make `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` take coroutine's kind parameter
For coroutines that come from coroutine-closures (i.e. async closures), we may have two kinds of bodies stored in the coroutine; one that takes the closure's captures by reference, and one that takes the captures by move.
These currently have identical layouts, but if we do any optimization for these layouts that are related to the upvars, then they will diverge -- e.g. https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/120168#discussion_r1536943728.
This PR relaxes the assertion I added in #121122, and instead make the `TyCtxt::coroutine_layout` method take the `coroutine_kind_ty` argument from the coroutine, which will allow us to differentiate these by-move and by-ref bodies.
|
|
Print a backtrace in const eval if interrupted
Demo:
```rust
#![feature(const_eval_limit)]
#![const_eval_limit = "0"]
const OW: u64 = {
let mut res: u64 = 0;
let mut i = 0;
while i < u64::MAX {
res = res.wrapping_add(i);
i += 1;
}
res
};
fn main() {
println!("{}", OW);
}
```
```
╭ ➜ ben@archlinux:~/rust
╰ ➤ rustc +stage1 spin.rs
^Cerror[E0080]: evaluation of constant value failed
--> spin.rs:8:33
|
8 | res = res.wrapping_add(i);
| ^ Compilation was interrupted
note: erroneous constant used
--> spin.rs:15:20
|
15 | println!("{}", OW);
| ^^
note: erroneous constant used
--> spin.rs:15:20
|
15 | println!("{}", OW);
| ^^
|
= note: this note originates in the macro `$crate::format_args_nl` which comes from the expansion of the macro `println` (in Nightly builds, run with -Z macro-backtrace for more info)
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0080`.
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unbox and unwrap the contents of `StatementKind::Coverage`
The payload of coverage statements was historically a structure with several fields, so it was boxed to avoid bloating `StatementKind`.
Now that the payload is a single relatively-small enum, we can replace `Box<Coverage>` with just `CoverageKind`.
This patch also adds a size assertion for `StatementKind`, to avoid accidentally bloating it in the future.
``@rustbot`` label +A-code-coverage
|
|
|
|
library
|
|
|
|
|
|
The payload of coverage statements was historically a structure with several
fields, so it was boxed to avoid bloating `StatementKind`.
Now that the payload is a single relatively-small enum, we can replace
`Box<Coverage>` with just `CoverageKind`.
This patch also adds a size assertion for `StatementKind`, to avoid
accidentally bloating it in the future.
|
|
|
|
This skips emitting extra arguments at every callsite (of which there
can be many). For a librustc_driver build with overflow checks enabled,
this cuts 0.7MB from the resulting binary.
|
|
Stop using `<DefId as Ord>` in various diagnostic situations
work towards https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/90317
Reverts part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/106281, as it sorts constants and that's problematic since it can contain `ParamConst`, which contains `DefId`s
|
|
coverage: Clean up marker statements that aren't needed later
Some of the marker statements used by coverage are added during MIR building for use by the InstrumentCoverage pass (during analysis), and are not needed afterwards.
```@rustbot``` label +A-code-coverage
|
|
interpret/allocation: fix aliasing issue in interpreter and refactor getters a bit
That new raw getter will be needed to let Miri pass pointers to natively executed FFI code ("extern-so" mode).
While doing that I realized our get_bytes_mut are named less scary than get_bytes_unchecked so I rectified that. Also I realized `mem_copy_repeatedly` would break if we called it for multiple overlapping copies so I made sure this does not happen.
And I realized that we are actually [violating Stacked Borrows in the interpreter](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-t-opsem/topic/I.20think.20Miri.20violates.20Stacked.20Borrows.20.F0.9F.99.88).^^ That was introduced in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/87777.
r? ```@oli-obk```
|
|
Some of the marker statements used by coverage are added during MIR building
for use by the InstrumentCoverage pass (during analysis), and are not needed
afterwards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
recursively evaluate the constants in everything that is 'mentioned'
This is another attempt at fixing https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/107503. The previous attempt at https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/112879 seems stuck in figuring out where the [perf regression](https://perf.rust-lang.org/compare.html?start=c55d1ee8d4e3162187214692229a63c2cc5e0f31&end=ec8de1ebe0d698b109beeaaac83e60f4ef8bb7d1&stat=instructions:u) comes from. In https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122258 I learned some things, which informed the approach this PR is taking.
Quoting from the new collector docs, which explain the high-level idea:
```rust
//! One important role of collection is to evaluate all constants that are used by all the items
//! which are being collected. Codegen can then rely on only encountering constants that evaluate
//! successfully, and if a constant fails to evaluate, the collector has much better context to be
//! able to show where this constant comes up.
//!
//! However, the exact set of "used" items (collected as described above), and therefore the exact
//! set of used constants, can depend on optimizations. Optimizing away dead code may optimize away
//! a function call that uses a failing constant, so an unoptimized build may fail where an
//! optimized build succeeds. This is undesirable.
//!
//! To fix this, the collector has the concept of "mentioned" items. Some time during the MIR
//! pipeline, before any optimization-level-dependent optimizations, we compute a list of all items
//! that syntactically appear in the code. These are considered "mentioned", and even if they are in
//! dead code and get optimized away (which makes them no longer "used"), they are still
//! "mentioned". For every used item, the collector ensures that all mentioned items, recursively,
//! do not use a failing constant. This is reflected via the [`CollectionMode`], which determines
//! whether we are visiting a used item or merely a mentioned item.
//!
//! The collector and "mentioned items" gathering (which lives in `rustc_mir_transform::mentioned_items`)
//! need to stay in sync in the following sense:
//!
//! - For every item that the collector gather that could eventually lead to build failure (most
//! likely due to containing a constant that fails to evaluate), a corresponding mentioned item
//! must be added. This should use the exact same strategy as the ecollector to make sure they are
//! in sync. However, while the collector works on monomorphized types, mentioned items are
//! collected on generic MIR -- so any time the collector checks for a particular type (such as
//! `ty::FnDef`), we have to just onconditionally add this as a mentioned item.
//! - In `visit_mentioned_item`, we then do with that mentioned item exactly what the collector
//! would have done during regular MIR visiting. Basically you can think of the collector having
//! two stages, a pre-monomorphization stage and a post-monomorphization stage (usually quite
//! literally separated by a call to `self.monomorphize`); the pre-monomorphizationn stage is
//! duplicated in mentioned items gathering and the post-monomorphization stage is duplicated in
//! `visit_mentioned_item`.
//! - Finally, as a performance optimization, the collector should fill `used_mentioned_item` during
//! its MIR traversal with exactly what mentioned item gathering would have added in the same
//! situation. This detects mentioned items that have *not* been optimized away and hence don't
//! need a dedicated traversal.
enum CollectionMode {
/// Collect items that are used, i.e., actually needed for codegen.
///
/// Which items are used can depend on optimization levels, as MIR optimizations can remove
/// uses.
UsedItems,
/// Collect items that are mentioned. The goal of this mode is that it is independent of
/// optimizations: the set of "mentioned" items is computed before optimizations are run.
///
/// The exact contents of this set are *not* a stable guarantee. (For instance, it is currently
/// computed after drop-elaboration. If we ever do some optimizations even in debug builds, we
/// might decide to run them before computing mentioned items.) The key property of this set is
/// that it is optimization-independent.
MentionedItems,
}
```
And the `mentioned_items` MIR body field docs:
```rust
/// Further items that were mentioned in this function and hence *may* become monomorphized,
/// depending on optimizations. We use this to avoid optimization-dependent compile errors: the
/// collector recursively traverses all "mentioned" items and evaluates all their
/// `required_consts`.
///
/// This is *not* soundness-critical and the contents of this list are *not* a stable guarantee.
/// All that's relevant is that this set is optimization-level-independent, and that it includes
/// everything that the collector would consider "used". (For example, we currently compute this
/// set after drop elaboration, so some drop calls that can never be reached are not considered
/// "mentioned".) See the documentation of `CollectionMode` in
/// `compiler/rustc_monomorphize/src/collector.rs` for more context.
pub mentioned_items: Vec<Spanned<MentionedItem<'tcx>>>,
```
Fixes #107503
|
|
For async closures, cap closure kind, get rid of `by_mut_body`
Right now we have three `AsyncFn*` traits, and three corresponding futures that are returned by the `call_*` functions for them. This is fine, but it is a bit excessive, since the future returned by `AsyncFn` and `AsyncFnMut` are identical. Really, the only distinction we need to make with these bodies is "by ref" and "by move".
This PR removes `AsyncFn::CallFuture` and renames `AsyncFnMut::CallMutFuture` to `AsyncFnMut::CallRefFuture`. This simplifies MIR building for async closures, since we don't need to build an extra "by mut" body, but just a "by move" body which is materially different.
We need to do a bit of delicate handling of the ClosureKind for async closures, since we need to "cap" it to `AsyncFnMut` in some cases when we only care about what body we're looking for.
This also fixes a bug where `<{async closure} as Fn>::call` was returning a body that takes the async-closure receiver *by move*.
This also helps align the `AsyncFn` traits to the `LendingFn` traits' eventual designs.
|
|
are FnDef/Closure or not
They may become FnDef during monomorphization!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
various clippy fixes
We need to keep the order of the given clippy lint rules before passing them.
Since clap doesn't offer any useful interface for this purpose out of the box,
we have to handle it manually.
Additionally, this PR makes `-D` rules work as expected. Previously, lint rules were limited to `-W`. By enabling `-D`, clippy began to complain numerous lines in the tree, all of which have been resolved in this PR as well.
Fixes #121481
cc `@matthiaskrgr`
|
|
Signed-off-by: onur-ozkan <work@onurozkan.dev>
|
|
|
|
|
|
cases that used `None`
|
|
|
|
r=compiler-errors,petrochenkov
`f16` and `f128` step 3: compiler support & feature gate
Continuation of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121841, another portion of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/114607
This PR exposes the new types to the world and adds a feature gate. Marking this as a draft because I need some feedback on where I did the feature gate check. It also does not yet catch type via suffixed literals (so the feature gate test will fail, probably some others too because I haven't belssed).
If there is a better place to check all types after resolution, I can do that. If not, I figure maybe I can add a second gate location in AST when it checks numeric suffixes.
Unfortunately I still don't think there is much testing to be done for correctness (codegen tests or parsed value checks) until we have basic library support. I think that will be the next step.
Tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/116909
r? `@compiler-errors`
cc `@Nilstrieb`
`@rustbot` label +F-f16_and_f128
|
|
a bit
- rename mutating functions to be more scary
- add a new raw bytes getter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Will be used in the next commit
|
|
|
|
constrained, instead of the current infcx root item.
This makes `Bind` almost always be empty, so we can start forwarding it to queries, allowing us to remove `Bubble` entirely
|
|
Diagnostic renaming 3
A sequel to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/121780.
r? `@davidtwco`
|
|
Also rename `into_diagnostic_arg` as `into_diag_arg`, and
`NotIntoDiagnosticArg` as `NotInotDiagArg`.
|
|
consistent way
|
|
|
|
Rollup of 8 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #118623 (Improve std::fs::read_to_string example)
- #119365 (Add asm goto support to `asm!`)
- #120608 (Docs for std::ptr::slice_from_raw_parts)
- #121832 (Add new Tier-3 target: `loongarch64-unknown-linux-musl`)
- #121938 (Fix quadratic behavior of repeated vectored writes)
- #122099 (Add `#[inline]` to `BTreeMap::new` constructor)
- #122103 (Make TAITs and ATPITs capture late-bound lifetimes in scope)
- #122143 (PassWrapper: update for llvm/llvm-project@a3319371970b)
Failed merges:
- #122076 (Tweak the way we protect in-place function arguments in interpreters)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
|
|
Add asm goto support to `asm!`
Tracking issue: #119364
This PR implements asm-goto support, using the syntax described in "future possibilities" section of [RFC2873](https://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/2873-inline-asm.html#asm-goto).
Currently I have only implemented the `label` part, not the `fallthrough` part (i.e. fallthrough is implicit). This doesn't reduce the expressive though, since you can use label-break to get arbitrary control flow or simply set a value and rely on jump threading optimisation to get the desired control flow. I can add that later if deemed necessary.
r? ``@Amanieu``
cc ``@ojeda``
|
